Genetic diversity and population structure of four cattle breeds raised in Turkey using microsatellite markers

Abstract

In the present study, genetic diversity and population structure of Holstein Friesian and three native cattle breeds of Turkey including Turkish Grey Steppe, Eastern Anatolian Red and Anatolian Black were assessed. Totally 120 individuals of 4 breeds were genotyped using 20 microsatellite markers and 204 different alleles, of which 31 were private alleles, were detected. The average observed and expected heterozygosity values were 0.63 and 0.74, respectively. Observed heterozygosity at the marker level ranged from 0.30 (DRBP1) to 0.88 (ILSTS011), while expected heterozygosity ranged from 0.51 (INRABERN172) to 0.88 (SPS113). Inbreeding coefficient values for Turkish Grey Steppe, Eastern Anatolian Red, Anatolian Black and Holstein Friesian were 0.216, 0.202, 0.128 and 0.069, respectively. The lowest pairwise F<sub>ST</sub> value (0.030) was detected between Turkish Grey Steppe and Anatolian Black breeds, while the highest value (0.070) was detected between Turkish Grey Steppe and Holstein Friesian. Results of structure and factorial correspondence analysis revealed that Turkish native cattle breeds and Holstein Friesian were genetically different enough to separate the two breeds. Results of bottleneck analysis indicated heterozygosity deficiency in Turkish Grey Steppe (P < 0.05).

Genetic Diversity Analysis and Determination of Specific Alleles of Kuantan Cattle Using Microsatellite Markers

“…PIC values of the three microsatellite loci (INRA35, HEL9, and ETH225) indicated a high polymorphism (>0.5). The mean of PIC values in this study was higher than Egyptian Cattle (El-Sayed et al, 2016), Punganur Cattle (Devi et al, 2017), and lower than Turkey Cattle (Demir et al, 2019). The high PIC value indicated that the microsatellite markers used are highly polymorphic, and it could be functional for analyzing the genetic diversity.…”

“…Genetic diversities based on microsatellite markers in indigenous and local cattle have been reported for many breeds of cattle, such as West African cattle (Alvarez et al, 2021), East Eurasian cattle (Svishcheva, 2020); Russian cattle (Abdelmanova et al, 2020), some of Indian local cattle (Vinod et al, 2019); European cattle (Garkovenko et al, 2018), Korean native cattle (Sharma et al, 2020), Egyptian native cattle (Faid-Allah et al, 2018), Lebedyn cattle (Ladyka et al, 2019), Zimbabwean Sanga cattle (Gororo et al, 2018), South African cattle (Westhuizen et al, 2020); and Turkey cattle (Demir et al, 2019). The technique has been applied to characterize Indonesia's local breed animals such as Aceh cattle (Abdullah et al, 2011), Indonesian swamp local buffalo (Saputra et al, 2020), Bali cattle (Jakaria et al, 2012), and local Indonesian cattle (Sutarno et al, 2016;Agung et al, 2019;).…”

Microsatellite diversity and restriction enzyme-based polymorphisms of MHC loci in native Turkish goats

“…This study revealed that native Turkish goat populations are of high genetic diversity and low inbreeding which could be attributed to different phenomenon. As highlighted by Demir & Balcioglu (2019), Anatolia is a part of domestication centre indicating that theoretically native Turkish goat breeds contain a large part of C. hircus gene pool. Additionally, sampling strategy may be another reason, since studied animals were provided from different representative herds in which animals were unrelated according to pedigree record.…”

Direct and indirect contributions of molecular genetics to farm animal welfare: a review

“…The aforementioned methods are utilized for many purposes in farm animals, including revealing genetic origins (Upadhyay et al ., 2017), selection signatures (Guo et al ., 2018), genetic diversity (Demir and Balcioğlu, 2019), population structure (Karsli et al ., 2020), population difference (Ceccobelli et al ., 2020), detecting genes related to economically important traits (Wang et al ., 2021), identifying genes related to resistance/susceptibility to specific infectious diseases (Bermingham et al ., 2014), carrier animals of genetic diseases (Gebreselassie et al ., 2019), analyzing phylogenetic relationships (Özşensoy et al ., 2019), and conducting parentage testing (Keskin et al ., 2019).…”